Lizbeth Marcs ([identity profile] liz-marcs.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] liz_marcs 2007-03-04 01:15 am (UTC)

*shakes head*

It's amazing to me that the whole "God on money and in the Pledge" argument completely discounts history. It's surprising that there's very little historical weight or tradition behind either.

For example, in my brother's DVD set of Looney Tunes, one of the extras is a 1939 film where Porky Pig (who was the star of Looney Tunes at the time) learns the Pledge of Allegiance. There is no "under God" in it, because at the time the line wasn't there. It was inserted in the pledge in the 1950s (right about the time "In God We Trust" was slapped on money and for the same reason).

It's just simply nuts because the mention of God on money and in the Pledge was done for political reasons and, as such, are completely devoid of any meaning as far as I can see.

Really, it's puzzling that's it's this huuuuuuuge deal today. You'd think that this stuff existed at the time of the Constitutional Convention, which it clearly didn't.

Post a comment in response:

(will be screened)
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org